Looking back at the rocky, mutually suspecting and disrespecting relations between Russia’s and China’s leaders, 1917-2000, this photo speaks volumes about the depth of Putin’s and Xi’s mutual friendship and the importance of Sino-Russian cooperation on the world stage, highlighted at last week’s SCO summit in Qingdao. They are brothers, amigos, and trusted partners on the world scene. We can all shudder in fear about what the 21st century would be like, without their committed and commanding presence.

During China’s post-Russian revolution period, 1917-1949, China’s relationship with Russia was decidedly lopsided. Vladimir Lenin did what seemed to be the impossible, overturning an imperial government into communist one, and not just in a small country, but one of the biggest and most important on the world scene.

After nearly a century of groveling humiliation at the feet of Eurangloland’s opium- and slave-fueled capitalist empire, and after being betrayed and kicked in the teeth by these same colonial powers in 1919’s post-World War I Versailles Treaty, future Chinese leaders, such as Deng Xiaoping, Zhou Enlai and Marshal Zhu De were in Europe – France mainly – being good subordinate students learning all about Marxism and Leninism.

China’s junior role as acolytes to the Soviet Union and Joseph Stalin’s urban-industrial Marxist-Leninist economy continued after Mao Zedong and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) equally shocked the world, by assuming communist power in the most populous and historically, one of the most powerful and important countries on the planet. However, Mao was a thorn in Stalin’s side from day one, as the future chairman saw what nobody else could envision – including most of his Chinese comrades – that China’s communist revolution had to swell up among the uneducated rural peasantry, and not among the industrialized urban proletariat. Thus, Maoism was born to join the socialist pantheon of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism, and as we all now know, Mao knew what he was talking about, in spite of all the derision raining down on him from Moscow.

Thus, it was inevitable that there would be a cataclysmic divorce between the USSR and China. It came in 1960, with Soviet Nikita Khrushchev’s perfidious betrayal of Russia’s most popular leader, Stalin, in his infamous speech (https://mobile.nytimes.com/1971/01/25/archives/british-experts-doubt-authenticity-of-khrushchev-remembers.html). As Deng Xiaoping said years later, China will never do to Mao what Russia did to Stalin. That stab in the back of greatness was beyond the pale for the Communist Party of China (CPC). You don’t throw out the baby with the bath water. Real, meaningful revolutions are inherently messy, violent and often chaotic. Mistakes will be made. You don’t take tremendous wealth from a handful of elites and distribute it to the masses without blowback from within and without. Such is life.

This was Russia’s second Great Schism, the first being in 1054, with Eastern Christians and Constantinople’s Orthodox Church renouncing control of Rome’s Catholic Pope. Looking back, they both changed history for all parties concerned – and the world. Every day we wake up, we are dealing with their consequences.

US President Richard Nixon brilliantly used this Sino-Soviet mistrust to get China to join the US in destroying the Soviet Union. China and Russia working together to convincingly defeat Western empire in Korea, 1950-1953 and later in Vietnam and Southeast Asia, became a nostalgic memory. Starting in the 1970s, China became a potent anti-Soviet ally for Uncle Sam. Unlike the CPC, the Soviet Communist Party did not adapt and evolve fast enough to the rapidly changing geo-economic tides of the 20th century, and we all know what happened. Even though Soviets voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to keep the Union together (https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/2gxmng/results_of_1991_referendum_to_preserve_the_soviet/), Western capitalism did what it does best, raping and plundering the former Soviet Union, thus turning its members into failed, gangster “shock doctrine” hellholes, starting in 1990. I can assure you that what happened in post-Berlin-Wall Russia got China’s habit of tinkering being pushed into overdrive. Along with the CIA’s nearly successful color revolution in 1989’s Tiananmen Square (http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2018/06/03/tall-tiananmen-tales-and-the-little-red-pill-a-china-rising-radio-sinoland-classic-for-this-june-4th-180604/), the CPC continued to adapt and evolve within its already successful, post-liberation Marxist-Leninist-Maoist social, economic and political framework, which is continuing today, having added Xi Thought. You can expect the CPC and its dawn of the Red Dynasty to continue into the 22nd century (http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2017/05/19/the-china-trilogy/).

The world then watched in awe, and for Eurangloland, in white-knuckled dread, as Vladimir Putin repeated for post-communist Russia what Mao did for post-imperial China. They both created big, economically, technologically and geopolitically powerful countries that relish being independent and standing up to Western imperialism. In the eyes of Baba Beijing, Putin is everything that Khrushchev could have and should have been. Unfortunately for humanity, this Asian alignment did not happen for another forty years and the dawn of the 21st century. Don’t look now, but that would be Chinese President Xi Jinping and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. Better late than never.

I know I just spent 750 words expounding on what may seem like frivolous background information. However, going back a thousand years on humanity’s timeline really puts into proper perspective what has been happening between the West, Russia and China, especially since the year 2000, when Putin first became president and then 2013, when Xi was elected to China’s top post.

In amiable reciprocity, Putin announced to humanity that Xi was the only outsider with whom he celebrated his birthday, knocking back shots of vodka and eating sliced (Russian) sausages, while calling Xi accessible, sincere and reliable (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oIQR419oPo). Take six minutes to watch the following excellent report on Putin’s visit to China and his flourishing friendship with Xi. The subtitles in English are professionally done (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQaWQ2Avxjk).

Was any symbolic gesture left out? Xi and Putin dropped the puck together at a junior Sino-Russian ice hockey match. Signs were waving in both Russian and Chinese. Children were everywhere in the arena. You can see that these leaders are really in their element and having a good time. Knowing Russian and Chinese ice hockey talent, I hope the Russian juniors did not kill the Chinese side too badly!

Next, gifts were exchanged. A Russian banya bathhouse made out of Altai cedar was given to Xi. Putin joked he wished he had one. Putin was presented with an ancient Chinese harp, called a guqin and a traditional Chinese figurine clay statue of Putin standing and gazing optimistically into the future. The two presidents noshed on Chinese veggie ‘n egg crepes and meat filled dumplings, which balanced out the vodka shots and Russian sausage to celebrate Putin’s birthday.

Later, there was the gorgeous, all-woman honor guard for Putin’s arrival at the Great Hall of the People, facing Tiananmen Square. Again, adoring children were on hand to greet him and hear together the military band play one of Russia’s iconic songs, Katyusha. About the only thing that wasn’t done was having Xi’s wife, Peng Liyuan sing it for Putin, since she can belt Slavic folk songs like a native,

The Russian press had front row seats for the whole SCO-Xi-Putin spectacle. Apparently, CNN and BBC did not.

Boatloads of deals were signed in energy, nuclear, hydrocarbons, space, airplanes, technology and finance
(http://en.people.cn/n3/2018/0609/c90000-9469191.html). Putin wore the white hat telling everybody about all the good things happening between the Russian and Chinese peoples, while Xi sported the black hat, obliquely criticizing the West for all of its illegal sanctions, blockades and America breaking numerous global treaties, while plugging the integration of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).

After Xi gave Putin China’s Medal of Friendship, you can see on the Russian president’s face that he is sincerely moved. The ceremony had all the pomp and circumstance of a royal wedding. Onto a ride in a highspeed train (HST) sharing tea (probably both Russian and Chinese), where – of course – Putin and Xi watched their two mutual HST mavens sign a bilateral cooperation and investment agreement.

Carefully observe their faces during this clip. Putin and Xi sincerely like each other’s company and have gained each other’s respect and admiration, sharing a common vision for all of humanity.

Putin is a great statesman who has revived the Russian people’s hopes and faith after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

Chinese people’s friendly attitude toward Putin is related to the shared disgust of the arrogance of the West, because the West uses very similar measures to lecture and provoke both China and Russia. Putin has become an unyielding and tough political icon in resisting Western hegemony.

We like Putin, because the Western world is in awe of him.

Looking at quote number two above, Westerners are ignorant of the fact that yes, half the Chinese love Deng Xiaoping and his socialist market reforms (mostly urbanites), but 1.3 out of 1.4 billion citizens here continue to hold Mao Zedong’s world view about Western empire and global capitalism. Mao’s prescient, bullseye geopolitical stance is slowly catching on around the planet, as colonialism’s lies, expropriation and exploitation are being more and more exposed. It’s just that the Chinese have been way ahead of the curve, since communist liberation in 1949. Thus, the Chinese have all the more reason to admire Putin, as he seems to hold Mao’s global view as well.

Every time I talk with Russians about the West, they can be fervent capitalists who adore the United States. Usually, these are the ones who have emigrated to the West and like to thumb their noses at their motherland. Those living and working in Russia are usually calm and reserved when talking about geopolitics and history. When I told Anna that I love Russia, the Russian people and Vladimir Putin, she replied rather defeatedly and sardonically, “Oh, you’re the first one”. Russians in Russia seem resigned to be persecuted, misunderstood and unappreciated by the rest of the world. Nothing has changed for a millennium.

Well, Anna, take heart my dear, because there are 1,400,000,000 Chinese who love your people, your country and your leader. You can add to that one Franco-American. I’ll be rooting for both teams, when Russia and France play the World Cup… What am I going to do if they go head to head?

We of course have to close out this piece with a faithful rendition of Katyusha;

The Essential Saker II: Civilizational Choices and Geopolitics / The Russian challenge to the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to get more info on formatting

(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.

and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:&nbsp;You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

Comment

Name:

E-mail:

27 Comments

Who, the contributor? I think not. Plenty of Kiwis and Ozzies admire and respect the Intelligence and compassion of both of these world leaders. The US and the UK don’t have leaders, just mouth puppets for the secret elite and asleep citizens esp the US.

In Austfailure we had ONE decent Federal Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, who visited Mao in 1971 to great abuse from the local reactionaries, who then had to shut up when it was announced that Kissinger was in China on a mission for Nixon at the same time. Oddly enough, now, forty plus years later, we are in the midst of a villainously racist Sinophobic hate campaign against China and even the local Chinese community, reminiscent of the worst excesses of the ‘White Australia’ days. Whitlam was ousted in a ‘constitutional’ coup, organised by the USA using a local asset, John Kerr, after a three year hate campaign by Murdoch and vicious sabotage by the Right. Since then our ‘leaders’ have been as scabrous a bunch of inadequates, malignant narcissists, imbeciles and psychopaths of varying degree. All, of course, have groveled to the USA and Israel, save Rudd, who changed a few UN votes regarding Israel, and expelled a Mossad agent from the Israeli ‘Embassy’ for their repeated theft of Australian passport identities (despite ‘assurances’ not to), after which the Israel First lackeys in his own party stabbed him in the back. Can’t have such ‘antisemites’ in power, now can you.

You really should be looking to trade Anna for one of the 1 400 000 000. Obviously, Russia has a problem with liberals. But there’s no point trying to pour Russian blood back into them. Exchange them for something better.

See, there’s a Dixieland American way of dealing with an Anna. It’s called “go to hell, anna!” It works much better than “why anna, why!”

larry
Yes, Russia has some problems with liberals, but their power and influence is grossly overrated. In fact they are losing the little influence they had. Western NGO’s in Russia tried using them for a color revolution, failing miserably. The point is that nobody in Russia can forget the Yeltsin years and liberal economics, when Russia was plundered of 100 billion dollars a year by foreign corporations, banks and domestic oligarchs. Worse for the West, Russians are watching the situation in Ukraine, which under Poroshenko is experiencing precisely what Russia experienced under Yeltsin, namely wide scale looting. Nobody wants a return to that.

I expected Ukraine to attack the Donbass either during the Russian presidential elections or during the World Cup. It did not come to that, and it probably will not happen. I have read that so far 8.000 Ukrainian conscripts have deserted from the Ukrainian military, 500 from one brigade alone. About a week ago I saw a video where a Ukrainian conscript stated that if Poroshenko attacked the Donbass, he will have nobody to fight, as all will have deserted. The Ukrainian military is a personification of it’s civilian society, which has become impoverished. That’s what happens when a liberal elite opens the country to plundering. Russians do not want to see that happening again, turning against their own liberals. I am wondering if Washington understands this.

I noticed that in the Red Square and the Hermitage, there were more Chinese than Russian tourists. There are more Chinese taking pictures in Moscow & Saint Petersburg than in D.C. & NYC.

The place is safe, people are friendly and helpful but it is a pity that communication in English is challenging. But then again, Russians want to keep the country Russian and their independence of mind and culture is palpable.

Another very big problem for tourism is that, well…, Russia is very big. One just does not have the time to visit all the interesting places let alone emerges itself in the kaleidoscope of cultures.

A great minority of Americans look down upon but at the same time fear Russians. Having Iranian roots, I was not one of them but after visiting Russia, I realized how impressive the country actually is. It is palpable that they have managed to keep Russian culture alive. My only suggestion would be that more explanation in English would be made available in historic places and museums.

In another note, the population just looks healthy and the average BMI in Moscow and Saint-Petersburg is around 24, I gestimate. So what is they don’t develop the latest (I am not even sure that it is the case) medical technology. There is not much efficiency in having tools for repairing problem that one does not have.

I didn’t notice an problem that is worse than in US nor did I see EXTREME poverty. People on average seem less opulent and modest but at the same time originally dressed and classy.

All the above is anecdotal but lots of anecdotes make a a complete story.

Very nice article. However, one point needs to be made. There was nothing brilliant about Nixon’s visit to China. In fact it was a very foolish move, for which the US is now paying a price.

Yes, there was mistrust between Russia and China back then, including that military border clash back in the 1960’s in southern Siberia. Nixon and the neocons all knew about Halford Mackinders warning to the British Government at the beginning of the 20th century about the importance of Eurasia and the dangers of a German-Russian economic alliance. This was repeated by Brzezinski. Nixon and the US elite decided to be clever and bring China into the “capitalist” camp, and China “agreed”, needing Western technology and markets. The US tried the old tactic of divide and conquer, using China against Russia. However, the US then, as now, has difficulty understanding foreign countries and cultures. Both Russia and China existed long before America was even discovered, and both have remarkable amounts of patience. The Chinese played along, building up their industry and acquiring markets. After that they turned towards Russia, needing its energy and high tech. They were certainly not going to fall for Washington’s divide and conquer tactics, especially not after Brzezinski wrote that foolish book called “The Grand Chess Board”, where he stated that the US would not tolerate the emergence of any power that would threaten it’s globalist interests. No doubt both the Russians and Chinese read the book, and both were inspired to turn to each other. And the result ? Today we have the BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union and the Silk Road, offering fair trade based on respect for the sovereign status of independent states, in direct contrast to Washington’s and Wall Streets methods of conducting foreign policy. In trying to outmaneuver both Russia and China, the US outplayed itself. And the result ? It has the largest foreign and domestic debt in the world, the dollar is printed backed by nothing, and Washington has resolved to imperial bully boy tactics, which are even directed against Europe, to the utter astonishment of European states, who are now seeing a former colony issuing imperial decrees.

Not only did Nixon establish contact with China, he even took the US dollar off the gold standard, starting a chain reaction. He sure made Russia and China great again, event though that was, of course, never the intention. Washington is now watching Europe moving slowly, but surely, towards the East, which in the long run is inevitable.

why should the Chinese peoples not admire Putin?
are they to ignorant to recognize the bombastic idiot who threatens wars against them?

that is saved for the americans.

interesting to me is how so many on the left…..believing anything negative the media tells them of Putin..while the ignorant right in majority like him..a reflection of their leader no doubt….but also a point that the MSM is lying…something the left fails to admit.

The Left in the imperialist countries is Cultural Marxist, and Cultural Marxism is the spawn of the CIA’s ”Congress for Cultural Freedom” back in the 1950’s. The congress promoted hedonism and infantilism as ”cultural freedom”, setting the West up for sex, drugs, and rock’n roll; later to be replaced by post-modernism, sexual aberrations, and all-out cruelty/bestiality. On this basis, the Western Left’s enmity towards Russia makes perfect sense, since the prevalent attitude in Russia towards this degeneracy is profound contempt. And the animosity is underlined further still by the prospect of Russia (and China) smashing the West’s parasitic existence which is the ultimate foundation for the Zio-gay ”way of life”.

I am like you Jeff, I love both Russia and China, too. Spent time in both countries. And I also notice that, young Russians outside Russia are often rather cynical about their home country. I attribute this to their knowledge of English and subsequent brainwashing by Western Press and the bad influence of the English taught in liberal educational institutions inside Russia.

Too bad, if they read English sites like The Saker and your article here, they might change their minds.

Everyone should read Jeff Brown’s books for a different view of China. At he same time, beware of his often over the top cheer leading. And keep in mind that the industrial growth of China and Russia share in destroying the future of our planet. In spite of gestures at environmental sensitivity and climate control, there is no backing off from more and more pollution and ecological destruction. We could end seeming to win the war against poverty, while destroying the planet.

Hi mike k! Yes! I’ve been debating whether or not to raise the topic of global warming and the ongoing climate change obviously taking place. It seems to be completely ignored, or perhaps doubted on this site. I’m in awe of the industrial growth of Russia and China and wish them success. BUT there is so much evidence from so many respected sources that increased industrial growth is at a terrible ultimate price. I also think it’s way past time to prevent eventual environmental collapse. That would have been possible if environmental concerns were addressed back in the 1970s. So, as I cheer Russia’s and China’s many ongoing successes and future planned projects, I also wonder how long it can continue before the true price of environment degradation is recognized. Here’s a link to Guy McPherson’s “Nature Bats Last”. When all the climate research from so many different and respected sources is put together, the future of humans on the planet looks quite dim.

I tend to agree, mike. I’m going to open up a small can of worms by saying that “if” both Russia and China can convince their people that, in spite of US economic numbers, which are generally agreed to be false, the kind of “prosperity” in the US (and in a growing number of its vassals/allies) is not prosperity, at all. It’s mindless consumption and spectacle, having nothing to do with culture, education, or anything else that defines a sovereign nation. Once they de-link from Western finance and the consumerist model, they’ll be free to follow a path that is less ecocidal. The world doesn’t need more useless “stuff”. The day they turn their backs on the hucksterism so prevalent in the West will be the day they free themselves.

Agreed Steve. But the addictive nature of consumerism, combined with the military and financial pressure from the Empire and others, is pushing all cultures to grow and “evolve” at what is a fatal rate for the planetary population, human and otherwise. Only a true “spiritual” revolution would have the power to persuade us to relent from the current path to our doom. The elephant in so many living rooms, including this blog, is this huge threat of human extinction in the near future. Those reaping short term profits from the ignorance of the population about climate change are very successful in keeping most of us in the dark about our most serious threat.

Again, I more or less agree. Russia is bad-mouthed for being “autocratic”, or a “dictatorship” because, apparently, Mr Putin believes in traditional Orthodox values, something that the West, with all its identity politics, sees as somehow retrograde or fascist or something. That may be the beginning of your spiritual revolution. What’s not to like about a single income family, regardless of who’s earning the money?

On this addictive nature of consumerism, Linh Dinh, who posts on “Unz”, has some interesting thoughts (on Japan, but they apply to all):
“In the past, Japanese merged with their plow, pottery, brush and sword. Now, they strive to be at one with their office cubicle, pachinko machine and Gucci bag. …
Disaffected, the Japanese don’t mug and loot, but geek or drop out. Thus you have the anime and manga nerds, hikikomori recluses who sometimes assault their parents with baseball bats and legions of virginal young men, dubbed “herbivores,” who don’t even try to have a girlfriend.
When not dropping out, Japanese overwork, sometimes to death from a heart attack or a stroke… the highest rate of suicides among developed nations, … and they ingest more anti-depressants than anyone else on earth. A wholesale rejection of everything.
But rejection doesn’t have to be self-destructive, and can even lead to a recovery of sanity…
The end of the American epoch, now unfurling, is an opportunity for all societies to rediscover themselves…
After a century and a half of destruction, it’s time to end the mourning.”
(“Tokyo Dreaming”, 3/5/2018 – http://www.unz.com/ldinh/tokyo-dreaming/#comments)

The military is the combination of the Army, Navy, Airforce. These are the main branches of the military. The US military is the strongest military in the world. If you want to know about the US military then you can visit our site. Camp Lejeune military bases in North Carlina

This text is interesting since at some point it comes to the essential matter, a comparison between Deng Xiaoping and Krutchev. The ideology of Krutchev worked very well although it took many years to destroy the realizations of the embryo of a communist society known as the Soviet Union, which was not that embryo like, but actually very efficient. I do not know anything about Deng Xiaoping. Is there any trace to the statement of Deng Xiaoping that not the same mistake should be made to throw away Mao, just like Stalin? I would like to read about it. It could also be interpreted as we better make a real hero into a popular popstar without content, like what was done to Che Guevara. I think indeed Putin should reintroduce Stalin on the rubble papers, not as a popstar but for his real realisations and for the proud of Russia, introduce communism with Russian characteristics and change the constitution in line with the Chinese constitution. We would make a step forward to clear thinking and make friendship between Russia and China even bigger.

Another thing is that in the communist thought as developed by Marx and Engels, the struggle of classes is something essential and is considered as the engine of the human society going forward (theory of historic materialism). The analysis is also that the economic situation defines the superstructure, i.e. the class in power defines the rules, laws, culture, … and this superstructure is used to keep the oppressed class(es) oppressed. This is not seen as something you just can choose by chosing your politics (or wording of your constitution), but the classes are realy existing in the real world by the economic relations they have to other classes and the fight between these classes is considered to be antagonistic.

The Chinese say they have their new socialism, somewhat adapted to their needs, which comprises capitalist aspects but under control of the communist party and that they up-hold dialectical and historical materialism. For me, this seems to be a contradiction in terminis, in that in my opinion you can not “up-hold” dialectical and historical materialism. I understand they mean we changed some things about the original theory and it seems to work. I am not against it, but explanations are not given how also theoretically this will work for the longer time. This is not helpful for other countries to use the same technique. In China it is said that every body has to follow his way. I agree with that. Nevertheless, if we understand certain principles of science it makes sense to apply them everywhere. For example, if Marx was not 100 % right, why not say where he was wrong? For me it sounds like 1+1 = 2 is only partially right, and I even agree, because I made a child.

Brown also goes very far in saying that democracy is inherent Chinese with the heavenly mandate dating from hundreds/ thousands of years ago. I think our friend Mao would not see the emperors as democratic and just see the emperors as a part of feodalism within the theory of dialectical and historical materialism. A class to be destroyed and oppressive in all senses, not democratic at all. I myself do not support democracy at all, since it is in my opinion just a bullshit story to deny class oppression, inherently linked to the economic situation. The dictatorship of the people is therefore the right name as long as it is really the case.

In the meantime I looked it up and Jeff B. is right about Deng Xiaoping, see the following:

Question by Italian Journalist Oriana Fallaci (1980): To what extent will Chairman Mao be involved when you hold your next Party congress?

Answer of Deng Xiaoping: We will make an objective assessment of Chairman Mao’s contributions and his mistakes. We will reaffirm that his contributions are primary and his mistakes secondary. We will adopt a realistic approach towards the mistakes he made late in life. We will continue to adhere to Mao Zedong Thought, which represents the correct part of Chairman Mao’s life. Not only did Mao Zedong Thought lead us to victory in the revolution in the past; it is — and will continue to be — a treasured possession of the Chinese Communist Party and of our country. That is why we will forever keep Chairman Mao’s portrait on Tiananmen Gate as a symbol of our country, and we will always remember him as a founder of our Party and state. Moreover, we will adhere to Mao Zedong Thought. We will not do to Chairman Mao what Khrushchov did to Stalin.

There are western writers, some of whom I respect, who complain on a regular basis that Putin isn’t doing it right. They complain that the Russians try to present facts, apply logic and use reason in the face of the western propaganda barrages. They complain that this isn’t working and that it won’t work.

Except, there are other relationships besides Russia’s with the west. Just perhaps, the reliance on facts, the reason and the logic are appreciated by the Chinese, and that this approach has helped that relationship.

From my mountain top, it seems as if the west has pushed Russia and China together. I wonder if perhaps it was a relief to the Chinese leadership that the nation that they are being pushed into an alliance with turns out to be run by smart people who rely on facts, reason and logic.

Consider the alternative. You’ve been meeting with your foreigh policy advisors and wise people. They all point out that the way the world is going that we really need to make an alliance with this other country. You hear over and over again in your preparations that we as a nations really need better relations and closer ties both economically and militarily with this other country.

You arrive at the meeting, and then Boris Johnson walks into the room.
Houston, we have a problem.

2) Those who make angry noises about the accelerating rot of the social fabric of the West and the plain MSM lies put forth to prettify it, but who instantly fall in line as soon as the blame game is ”shifted abroad”: Russia, Iran, the DPRK, China etc. At bottom, they trust Massa when slandered foreigners are ’misbehaving’.

3) Same as (2) except for the fact that they switch their allegiances in favour of the Zionazis based on the time parameter. They rightfully reject today’s stinking swamp of Western lies, lawlessness, and corruption worldwide, but fall instantly in line as soon as the subject is switched to the West’s slanders of the 20th century; hence the rabid, unending screamfest about Stalin, Mao, and Kim Il Sung.

Put simply, the Party Line amounts to this: Whatever your grievances about the West, don’t ever commit High Treason by showing some respect and admiration for its most reputable enemies, past and present.

Also, you raised my curiosity as to where Stalin’s and Mao’s death tolls currently stand at. 9 billion? Avogadro’s number?

Sitemap

Saker Android App

An Android App has been developed by one of our supporters. It is available for download and install by clicking on the Google Play Store Badge above.

All the original content published on this blog is licensed by Saker Analytics, LLC under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0). For permission to re-publish or otherwise use non-original or non-licensed content, please consult the respective source of the content.